mazda + alfa
Mazda announced earlier today that they’ve signed a “memorandum of understanding” with Fiat to develop a rear-wheel-drive roadster to be marketed by Mazda and Alfa Romeo. WTF!? I did not see this coming, and initially I didn’t know what to think. Mazda and Alfa are among my absolute favorite marques. The two of them together? Maybe it felt too good to be true, or maybe it’s the foreboding horror of badge-engineering.
I’ve had some time to think and read the reactions of auto journalists, and I think ultimately this is good for both companies. Here’s the thing. If you look at Mazda’s lineup right now, few of their cars have 0% component-sharing with another marque. Both Mazda3 and the current Mazda2 were cooperatively developed with, respectively, the Ford Focus (+ Volvo S40) and Fiesta. The Mazda5, being based on the 3, shares chassis components with Focus and its derivatives also. The V6 engine found in various Mazdas are also Ford-derived. Conversely, the Mazda6/Atenza platform has also found its way into many Ford products. This was all a function of Mazda’s long ties with and prior ownership by Ford. For Ford, it made sense to make use of its subsidiary’s resources and expertise in developing compact cars. For Mazda, the cost-sharing was probably crucial for such a small company. Now that Mazda is independent again, however, that safety net in partnership is gone.
This is not to say that Mazda is incapable of developing its own cars from the ground-up. The opposite is true, in fact. Post-Ford, Mazda has initiated developments of its next-generation vehicle platforms and technologies that the marketing people are calling SKYACTIV. Under this banner, numerous impressive technologies developed by Mazda in-house have already emerged, the best example being the new high-compression engines that deliver high fuel economy without the use of hybrid technology. The first completely new Mazda vehicle of this generation, the CX-5, also just hit market, and it appears that more good things are still to come from the engineers in Hiroshima. Objectively, however, Mazda needs the bucks. As excellent as the CX-5 is, as many engineering awards as they can win, and as many racing and driving enthusiasts’ hearts they can capture, Mazda needs to function as a business. And that means profit. In the US, Mazda has seen increased sales nearly every month for the past three or so years, yet their financial situation is still not great. Blame part of it on the weak dollar against the yen. In any case, they may not be in the kind of trouble Lotus or Mitsubishi Motors is in, but they certainly aren’t turning in fat profits like Hyundai or Honda. Mazda deserves to do better.
So what to do? People with degrees (and cloned minds) from business schools might suggest Mazda to cut the enthusiast and racing non-sense and go the Honda route—reach for the lowest common denominator with good, cheap, and reliable cars best described as inoffensive. The truth is Mazda has tried this, shortly after Ford took controlling interest in the mid-/late-’90s. Remember the last 626? Or the 2nd-generation MPV? It didn’t work. Through those boring-and-bland years it became evident that for Mazda to succeed, it needs to play in its niche and play it well instead of trying to join the ranks of mediocre mass appeal. Fast forward to today, much of its recent efforts and resources have been directed at SKYACTIV and cars like the CX-5, Mazda2, and Mazda3. These are the sellers, cars that sustain Mazda’s business. Yet the Miata is one of the defining products for Mazda, one which Mazda really can’t do without at this point. It is still beloved and celebrated by enthusiasts and the press. But how much resources can Mazda devote to this car? It needs to be excellent, but it may not return as much profit per R&D dollar as the bread-and-butter cars. With the NC Miata, Mazda lucked out because it shared platform and transmission with the RX-8. The 8 is gone. Hence, the partnership with Fiat.
I do have a few concerns. First is a logical extension of the last few sentences: does this mean that Mazda has given up on the next RX? Undesirable this may be, but I think it’s more likely than not. Unless you’re a specialist or/and charging a lot of money for your cars, the business case for having more than one sports car in the lineup is always questionable. Nissan still does it, but it’s a much bigger company able and willing to weather the cost of the GT-R program. Even Toyota had to farm out substantial development work to Subaru for its neo-hachiroku. The best we can hope for, then, may be that in addition to the excellence expected of the next Miata, Mazda will also give us a proper coupe version to compete with the Toyota 86. Another concern is badge-engineering. In the press release, Mazda explicitly said that theirs and Alfa’s versions will have distinctive designs and proprietary engines. How much veracity there is here can only be known when the actual cars come out. Fortunately, Fiat has been putting out quite a lot of advanced engines lately, and Alfa is certainly not lacking skills in the design department. The potential intermingling makes for nice fantasies instead of cringes. My other concern is less well-founded, and it has to do with Chrysler, which Fiat now owns. However you cut it, Chrysler sucks. In areas where it doesn’t utterly suck as much as GM, it makes up for it in other sucky ways. I don’t want any trace of Chrysler in my Mazda. Period.
Mazda enthusiasts better breathe a sigh of relief, because worrying is useless anyway. Alfa Romeo is one of the most celebrated marques, and to be paired up as such makes for a dream team and in the best case scenario, well, is the best case scenario: a Miata with the panache and *passion* (groan if you must) of Alfa, and an Alfa with the build quality and reliability of Miata. This should make for the best possible roadster.
In 1961, Shelby got in touch with the British car company AC about making and importing a car powered by a V8 engine. Lacking a proper competitor against the Corvette, Ford gladly provided the engine, and thus the most famous Anglo-American sports car was born. The prototype AC Ace was sent from England to LA in February, 1962. Shelby took it to hot rodder Dean Moon (of Moon Speed Equipment and Mooneyes fame) in Santa Fe Springs, where it was promptly mated to the Ford V8, completing the very first Shelby/AC Cobra. A month later, Shelby opened his shop in Venice (that location is actually now Marina Del Rey), where the final assembly of the Cobra took place. The rest, as they say, is history. The Cobra is one of the most legendary and iconic sports cars of the ’60s. It, along with its Daytona Coupe racing variant, also saw considerable success on the racetrack. Today, genuine Cobras are among the most valuable commodities in the automotive world, and the Cobra is one of the most popular replica and kit cars along with the Lotus Seven.
After the Mustang came out, Ford approached Shelby to build a high-performance version. As most people know (though many deny), the original Mustang was a sporty-looking car built on the cheap. Weight reduction along with engine and chassis modifications turned the Shelby GT 350 into more of a sports car. Faced with increasing volume, Shelby moved from the Venice shop to an airplane hanger at LAX, where some of his best Mustangs were assembled. Along with the GT 350 was the GT 350R racing version, of which fewer than 30 were made. With the new 1967 Mustang, Shelby upped the ante and added the more powerful GT 500. This is perhaps the sweetest of the Shelby Mustangs. After ‘67, Ford took over production of the Shelby Mustangs. Production moved from Shelby’s shop to Michigan and eventually faded after ‘69.
Carroll Shelby has done much more in his life since then (he also built and raced some Toyota 2000GTs in ‘68), but to me, these are among the greatest of his legacies in the automotive world. He was also known as the proverbial nice guy in the car business. I once almost met him when, a few years ago, I visited his company outside Vegas. After the tour of the factory where Shelby-ized new Mustangs were being put together, I lingered at the little museum with a nice collection of old Shelby vehicles. And he showed up to greet a group of guests. Seemed like a really nice guy, but I was too scared to barge in to meet him. Looking at his creations in the ‘60, he was a true master of the trade with a definite good eye for good products, as the Cobra through the ‘67 GT were all highly desirable and excellent production cars from what was ultimately a small and independent company. Well, somewhat independent, as Ford did lend considerable support. Case-in-point, the ‘67 GT 500 transformed a cheap pony car into a genuine high-performance GT that posed real threat to the Corvette Sting Ray. He remained active all his years, having participated in the development of the Viper all the way to the latest SVT Mustang. And this all in just his professional life. A true legend, he will be missed. RIP.
What’s fun about this pairing is that while the two cars were barely contemporaries—the Toyota ending production in ‘87 and the Mazda beginning production in ‘86—today they share a fair amount of similar characters and capabilities. Back in the day, however, and especially here in the US, pitting them together would have made little sense to most people. In fact, I wonder how many Americans back then took note of the intrinsic goodness of this particular *Corolla* as a sports car. My mom’s friends had one, a 2-door SR5. It was red, automatic, and with a sunroof. What do I remember about it? I liked the pop-up headlights and the sunroof, and that it was really really slow. I also remember how the sight of an FC—one of my favorite cars then, and now—would light up my eyes, and that the Corolla never touched the pedestal of the RX-7. I mean, the FC was still kicking ass on the American racetrack then, dominating IMSA races like none has ever or since. And the AE86, well the word “drift” was not as much in the American (or my) car culture. People preferred the term “power slide,” and drifting as a sport? Most would laugh. The AE86 in the US was probably the best sleeper ever.
Kudos to Toyota for making the AE86 at that time. And kudos to them for selling it here. An affordable, small, two-door, rear-wheel-drive car, that’s a rare thing. The FC was certainly geared towards a different market, although at the lower trim it was a fairly affordable car (thanks in part to the availability of the non-turbo model in the US). The Nissan 200SX—or the S12 Silvia—was a bit closer in terms of market position. In fact, the S12 looked quite similar to the AE86. Incidentally, a high school friend had one of these. My memory of that car? Pretty similar to that of my mom’s friends’ SR5 AE86. For some reason, the S12 is forgotten and left behind these days. After all these years, father time has erased a fair bit of the price differential between the FC and AE86. Both are similarly-sized, RWD coupes with intrinsically good sports car underpinnings. And if you look just a bit harder, you can even find an FC with two rear seats. Due to the relative rarity of the US-spec AE86, the FC actually is frequently the better sports car bargain. Some people would tell you that with the FC, Mazda went soft like Nissan did w/ the 280ZX. There’s a tiny element of truth there, but it’s mostly hogwash. The FC was bigger and better appointed than the SA, and in turbo trim, a bit of a juggernaut. But in terms of driving dynamics, it’s top notch. A solid, good sports car through and through. And you just can’t compare it to the FD, a car that was designed to take the pure sports car concept near the extreme. Like the AE86, the FC can be a decently practical driver (harder to say this with the FD). And like the AE86, it oozes Japanese sports car and nostalgic street cred. Get over the geekiness and any thought or hint of cosplay, and the image of an AE86 and an FC running up and down the Santa Monica Mountains is about as delicious as it gets. It’s kind of a fantasy nostalgia for a past that never really happened here in the US, but it makes perfect sense now.
